I finally saw Skyfall last night. It obviously blows QOS out of the water, and gives Casino R a run for its money in terms of which one is better (very different films with respect to energy).

The Shanghai tower sequences are stunning for their lighting; really exceptional. They gave Judi Dench a great role, which is good since I found her character a bit tiresome in the previous two.

The only thing/edit I didn't like was the out of Instanbul => farms => mountainous gorge train ride ( in 8 mins)... which reminded me of some Indiana Jones type chases which defy geographical logic. I try not to be too picky, but when it is that obvious it can be distracting.

A definite AYE for Sam Mendes to continue the franchise!

PS : I was astounded with the Thomas Newman score... way different for him, obviously!

I think would be great to have Sam Mendes or Martin Campbell return and Roger Deakins because SKYFALL was simply STUNNING in terms of its look and CASINO ROYALE still holds its own as the best Bond film action wise. The only other directors that would excite me are:

Well, Chris, y'know - against years of evidence we ignorantly ignored - we Tried to inaugurate an Appreciation along the lines you assert and you know the systematic inevitably intolerant sabotage by some self-crowned 'experts.....].

We got no trouble with Eon beaming aboard first or even second class directors who surprise everyone by rising to the challenge but to wanna have everything redone visually just to have your 'stamp' onnit is mucho much.

It's supposed to be 007 not "My Auteurist Take Refashioning Bond in My Own Image" looniness.

Hey, i am man enuf to admit it - SKYFALL & Craig were both excellent {i still dislike the first two entries and always will] bruce

That's the interesting part... is there too much variety in this series now? Allow me to explain... unlike Bruce, I love Casino Royale. It's not necessarily the greatest, but it is an enjoyable "how did Bond begin" yarn. It's even better that it took this long to tell the tale as knowing what comes later enhances the experience. But has this series gone on so long, and offered so much variety (in story, storytelling, cinematic styles, lead actors, etc...) that it is now impossible for people to just enjoy these films as a collective whole?

In no other series do we have such diversity. I can rarely find two Bond fans (I'm talking die hard lovers of the series here) that agree on the series as a whole. Some prefer the comical edge brought in the Moore years (though truthfully started in "Diamonds Are Forever"), while others prefer the darker Connery years. Some will fight for Dalton to the death, and yet others still say there was no Bond until Brosnan played him. Now we have Craig, the "IT" of this generation who Roger Moore just recently (he used to say Connery) called the "greatest Bond" ever.

The films have been campy, dark, serious, exploitive, and now even somewhat art house-ish. No one can agree on any three points, yet we all love "Bond".